The answer to the question about them wizards and their tendency to ensure chaos rather than help might lie in Pratchett's essay 'why Gandalf never married'. If I remember it correctly Pratchett back then pointed out how 'normally' it's always the male magic-users that save the day while the women always come second or third place if they aren't the bad guys.

Need to read the article again.
As for the Mary Sue bit. Generally I'm one of the first to point and yell that, though with Tiffany...might be because the book is still for younger readers. But still.... Haven't been able to read it yet myself (try finding the english origina where I live ) but haven't heard that many a good things...

Hm, I've never read this article ... But I recently read the book called "Brida" by a Paul Coelho, and he writes there of two "witch traditions" or so ... of men rather being the ones who preserve knowledge, and women doing the practical thins ... That's how I have it in my memory.

From that perspective, the Discworld mirrors that. There's only few exceptions of the rule.

I like the fact that in the DW the witches are far more effective in solving the 'big problems' than wizards.

I'm trying to think of one DW novel where any of the wizard faculty at UU actually solved the major plot threat. Rincewind is usually the one inadvertendly saves everything and that's always by accident.

Compare to the witches books, where the witches themselves defeat the villains through their "non-wizard" magic. The best example is Lords and Ladies, where Ridcully is completely impotent against stopping the Elf Queen's intrusions, which are resolved mainly by Granny's magic and Magrat's fists.

If something is a shambles, it's a complete mess, which is probably a good description of anything made just from bits of rubbish in your pocket. But the item described by Terry is as far as I know, made up by him.

I imagine it as a less sophistcated version of a dreamcatcher - like a cat's cradle.

What's up with this glass? Excuse me? Excuse me? This is my glass? I don't think so. My glass was full! And it was a bigger glass!

Sorry for reviving an old thread, but I wasn't on the forum when the book was first discussed. I've read the previous posts, but I don't think anybody mentioned one bit that really bothered me. When Mr Petty hanged himself, what gave Tiffany the right to cut him down and revive him? He'd made his decision, he wanted to die. Why should she thwart him like that?

Given Terry's much-publicised views on people having the right to choose the time and manner of their death (something I agree with completely) I think what Tiffany did was pretty damned close to being a crime.

Correct me if I#m wrong (as said, haven't read it yet) but from what I know he never has to face up to what he has done, but all the story provides is a 'happy ending' as he is now behaving like a picture-book husband.

I strongly recommend, LilMaibe, that you stop commenting on works you have not yet read. And have you read the rest of the Tiffany series yet? You really must read all of them in order before you can begin to understand what Terry is saying in I Shall Wear Midnight. This will save you from making the rather stupid misstatements you seem to be prone to.

Tiffany forces Mr. Petty to face the truth of what he has done when she lets him feel his daughter's pain. And she sends him off not because she thinks he particularly deserves to live, but because she knows the rough music is coming. She does not want the good people of the village to commit a murder.

When she returns after taking Amber to Jenny, she finds that he has returned after the rough music left, placed a bouquet of nettles around the dead baby, and then tried to hang himself. It is this sign of repentance that causes her to ask Rob to cut him down.

Tiffany acts as a witch should--doing what is necessary and right. That is not the same thing as doing what other people may think is good.